If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

LIfe as a fence sitter

Life as a fence sitter can be awfuly lonley in this froum of RDI"S and IDI diehards
The advantage of sitting up here on this fence is I get lots of time to think and watch the world on both sides. Here are my lists that I compose up on my fence:

Why I think the Ramseys did it:
1. How could an inturder have been so active in that house and kill a child and no one heard a thing?

2. The Ransom note

3. Jonbenets poses in the pagents. I find these very disturbing and raises huge conerns about the parents of this child.

4. Lack of intruder evidence. All intruder evidence is infurred and not conclusive.

5. The Ramseys behavior the morning jonbenet was found missing

6. John Ramsey wanting to leave for atlanta so quickly after the discovery of
jonbenet's body.

1. This crime is so horrific I can not believe a parent could do it.
Much less two parents involved in covering it up

2. The open window

3. The sheer brutality of the crime

and thats it...

Suddenly, the world on my IDI side of the fence is looking very meak.
I notice that my reasoining on the IDI side has 3 emotive believes and only one piece of evidence. Does anyone want to add to my lists? It might just be that the time has come where I am finding myself falling off the fence.

Life as a fence sitter can be awfuly lonley in this froum of RDI"S and IDI diehards
The advantage of sitting up here on this fence is I get lots of time to think and watch the world on both sides. Here are my lists that I compose up on my fence:

Why I think the Ramseys did it:
1. How could an intruder have been so active in that house and kill a child and no one heard a thing?

2. The Ransom note

3. Jonbenets poses in the pagents. I find these very disturbing and raises huge conerns about the parents of this child.

4. Lack of intruder evidence. All intruder evidence is infurred and not conclusive.

5. The Ramseys behavior the morning jonbenet was found missing

6. John Ramsey wanting to leave for atlanta so quickly after the discovery of
jonbenet's body.

1. This crime is so horrific I can not believe a parent could do it.
Much less two parents involved in covering it up

2. The open window

3. The sheer brutality of the crime

and thats it...

Suddenly, the world on my IDI side of the fence is looking very meak.
I notice that my reasoining on the IDI side has 3 emotive believes and only one piece of evidence. Does anyone want to add to my lists? It might just be that the time has come where I am finding myself falling off the fence.

mjak

My main reasons:

A. Parents Theory:
1. they didn't take a lie detector test for months.
2. Arndt saw coldness in John Ramsey's eyes and said they exchanged telling glances.
3. Ramsey disturbed the crime scene by picking up the body. Moreover his accounts of what happened in the basement when he was searching were conflicting.
4. Patsy called many friends asking them to come over, thus disturbing the crime scene (the entire house). Why wouldn't she realize that if there was an intruder, the counters should not be wiped and so on. With so much touching of the crime scene, she knew it would be confused.
5. The Ramsey family had a website which is gone now. If they were seriously looking for the killer they'd keep it up even now.
6 Patsy was not ruled out as the author of the note.
7. They showed an unconcerned attitude toward their children by having the alarm system off; the kids' rooms on another floor so they couldn't hear them.

B. Intruder Theory:
1. Lou Smit's presentation of how a man could enter through the basement window was convincing.
2. The suitcase found near that window with a shard of glass on it.
3. The unknown male dna found on JBR.
4. No alarm system on means they could have easily got in.
5. Brutality of the garotte points against parents or brother committing this crime for any reason.
6. Still looks like her size 6 panties she was wearing are not accounted for; i.e. killer took them
7. Ransom note actually makes the parents look more guilty so why would they bother with it
8. Parents if they killed her had ample time to spirit the body away and dump it. However, parents if they accidentally killed her would have called 911 immediately. The body itself points to a killer who was obsessed with her, planned to take her either dead or alive but panicked and thought he had to get away fast.

These are the main things. I am not actually a fence sitter; I just don't know anymore. 9 years ago I believed the theory that the parents did it by accident and covered it up. After the arrest of Karr I thought it was amazing how his confessions matched Lou Smits' theory so much. However: that is a case against an intruder too, that anyone could have read Smits' theory or saw it on TV.

I think the case is too confusing, and will never be solved. Whoever did it committed the perfect crime.

I believe close enough's thread link will provide this information, but the big problem with your one piece of evidence for an intruder -- the open window -- has a BIG flaw. The door to that room was blocked by a chair and some boxes. John Ramsey says he had to move those in order to get into the room to check it. Therefore, it is absolutely impossible for the intruder to have used that window to get out. Impossible. And if an intruder used the window to get in, he pulled the metal grill over the window well before entering the basement, walked through the train room, closed the door and blocked it with a chair and boxes before going on with his business in the house. It doesn't make any sense. The window has nothing to do with the case.

Amen to that. I posted in another thread about how hard it is to think of the parents doing this. Especially because they have no 'known' history of anything. That is the only reason I have my little doubt!

I myself have yet to hear a reasonable explanation from IDI theories as to how fibers from John's clothing ended up in Jonbenet's panties...and mind you, those were the panties that were the wrong size for her.

Nor as to how fibers from Patsy's clothes ended up wound within the "garrotte" apparently built on her unconscious daughter and wrapped tightly around her neck.

Strange how our intrepid intruder left no fibers of his own, it would seem.

I believe close enough's thread link will provide this information, but the big problem with your one piece of evidence for an intruder -- the open window -- has a BIG flaw. The door to that room was blocked by a chair and some boxes. John Ramsey says he had to move those in order to get into the room to check it. Therefore, it is absolutely impossible for the intruder to have used that window to get out. Impossible. And if an intruder used the window to get in, he pulled the metal grill over the window well before entering the basement, walked through the train room, closed the door and blocked it with a chair and boxes before going on with his business in the house. It doesn't make any sense. The window has nothing to do with the case.

In addition, the spider web found on the window was unbroken, hence no intruder came or left via that window...

Amen to that. I posted in another thread about how hard it is to think of the parents doing this. Especially because they have no 'known' history of anything. That is the only reason I have my little doubt!

Scott Peterson also had no known history of killing, there's always a first time, doesn't prove anything.

Suddenly, the world on my IDI side of the fence is looking very meak.
I notice that my reasoining on the IDI side has 3 emotive believes and only one piece of evidence. Does anyone want to add to my lists? It might just be that the time has come where I am finding myself falling off the fence.

mjak

RDI has to be looking very meak these days, considering JK. The 'inside information' that JK supposedly knew, had LE checking his DNA, which turned up false. That means that LE thinks a DNA positive would have been significant, right? The unmatched DNA is important to LE, and it can be easily seen that IDI is important to LE.

Since IDI is obviously important to LE, who is better informed than you, I'd add "IDI is important to LE" to your fence-sitter's list.

The medical evidence pointing to a history of past sexual abuse of JBR. The repeated urinary and vaginal infections. The large number of doctor visits prior to her death. I also found it odd that John Ramsey mentioned leaving the country when Kass was arrested.

I also found their behavior disturbing on the day of the murder. I discount any handwriting experts since many of them thought Kass was the author of the ransom note too.

There are just so many odd things about this case. But still, I can't say that I have a clue about who may have been the perpetrator of this crime. I fear we many never know for sure.

Sherlockmom

You cannot reason someone out of a position that they did not use reason to get to in the first place.

One of the biggest problems with this case is that it was handled so badly from day one that we cannot even rely on the most elementary details of crime scene description or supposed 'evidence', including the legendary fingernail DNA.

Overall, the behavior of the Ramseys was bizarre in the extreme, and the fact that they got away with virtual obstruction is also bewildering.

The fact that the DA's office couldn't even bring any kind of case against Karr tells you everything you need to know about the utter ineptitude of their staff.

They were out of their league from the beginning, and to have these intellectual hillbillies still calling the shots is simply a joke.

To allow anybody to remove anything from the crime house is staggering. The Mytwinn doll, which could easily have been a source of DNA evidence, was picked up on Patsy's orders as soon as it could be spirited away. It wasn't the only thing.

The idea that a single tiny spot of blood on the panties (whose panties, anyway?) must have been the killer's blood, and that the fingernail DNA must have been the killer's, doesn't seem to correlate with the idea that the forensics people don't seem to think the killer left ANY other DNA at the scene. Despite all of the physical contact and prolonged activity.

If the killer were wearing the kind of clothing - scuba suit, or whatever, that would prevent the depositing of stray DNA - which would have to have included a full face mask - how could JBR Have managed to scratch the killer, anyway?

I could more easily believe that JBR had been killed during an attempted alien abduction, or by a pedophile time traveler (statistically, they are out there), than the story that the Ramseys are asking the world to believe.

No fence for me. The Alanta thing that morning......where did she go in her last living days? Alanta She was there for her treatment and there is were she died. It must of been a safe place for her. For what ever her reasons maybe. I really don't think anyone can question how someone should act that hasn't been in the same situation. We all have our own ways of dealing with things.
I know I would of picked up my daughter if I would of found her... she was kidnapped.(his mind wasn't on thinking evidence, he found his kidnapped daughter) He was being a dad by taken her upstairs. He didn't know she was dead until her laid her down.
The DNA is the case solver here. It was so important in finding Karr not to be the one who did this. So why doesn't that have the same affect for the parents???? I just can't understand why there is such a double standards in all that.
I think the person or persons where in the house the whole time they were gone and had the time to put everthing back the way it was when they got there, the person or persons didn't have a clue what they were going to do when they came home.
I can also believe they didn't hear anything either. My house isn't close to the size of the Ramseys and I can't hear my daughter coming home when she is out. (We take turns DH and I waiting up for her) I don't hear anything downstairs when I'm up stairs in my room.
I think some day this crime will be solve when the DNA is matched.

I know I would of picked up my daughter if I would of found her... she was kidnapped.(his mind wasn't on thinking evidence, he found his kidnapped daughter) He was being a dad by taken her upstairs. He didn't know she was dead until her laid her down.
The DNA is the case solver here. It was so important in finding Karr not to be the one who did this. So why doesn't that have the same affect for the parents???? I just can't understand why there is such a double standards in all that.

Oh come on! There is no way I would have picked up my daughter had I found her! I would've been screaming my head off for the police to get down there!!! John knew she was dead- her body was stiff from rigor mortis, and she probably was turning grey- this was hours after her estimated time of death, he didn't just find her upon minutes of her dying!
The fiber evidence, which John and Patsy managed to corrupt because it implicated them, is far more important to this case than some old degraded DNA in JB's panties from the factory!!! The Ramsey's are not just the parents in this case, they are her murder suspects.

Oh come on! There is no way I would have picked up my daughter had I found her! I would've been screaming my head off for the police to get down there!!! John knew she was dead- her body was stiff from rigor mortis, and she probably was turning grey- this was hours after her estimated time of death, he didn't just find her upon minutes of her dying!
The fiber evidence, which John and Patsy managed to corrupt because it implicated them, is far more important to this case than some old degraded DNA in JB's panties from the factory!!! The Ramsey's are not just the parents in this case, they are her murder suspects.

Indeed...I too believe the DNA in the panties are simply from a factory worker.

What is important is that fibers from John's clothing were in the panties/on her crotch...and that Patsy's fibers were entwined with the garrotte.

I also remember the detective on the scene found it odd how John carried Jonbenet up the stairs...he held her by the waist and away from himself. It was like he was a carrying an item rather than a person.
There might be significance to that...

I've always been a fence-sitter, too - however, I lean towards the RDI side the more I read. I hadn't kept up with this case over the years, but with Karr's arrest and debacle, I've been reading up and I'm still on the fence and leaning hard toward the RDI side.

I pray for justice for JonBenet, but I don't know if she'll ever get it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*My posts are my opinions, expressed freely thanks to the First Amendment.*